- In PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com, Paul Bowers <pbowers@p...>
wrote:
> NicaDan wrote:
> >
> > I work for a mechanical contractor that does commercial and
> > industrial piping. We are looking at piping software to be used
in
> > layout, coordination, fabrication, and record drawings. The
> > preference would be a product that is either Autocad based or
> > compatible. We would want to be able to overlay our piping
layouts
> > with the drawings produced by other contractors and vice versa.
> > (Most of them in this area use Autocad.)
> >
> > Here are some of the products we are considering:
> > CadPipe by AEC
> > PipeDesigner 3D by Quick Pen
> > CadWorx by Coade
> > Mech-Q by ASVIC
> >
> > I would appreciate anybody's praises or cautions about any of
the
> > above products for our proposed use, as well as any other
software
> > products that we might want to consider.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Dan Rosenberger
>
> From what I can infer from their information, Mech-Q relies upon
> AutoCAD's solids generation.
>
> This can be useful for smaller projects where the image is more
> important than the intelligence contained within the drawings.
>
> It is apparently not quite the same thing as Cadpipe and the
others
> which have databases associated with the graphics whereby the data
can
> be used/exported for flow calculations, stress analysis, etc.
>
> Mech-Q's advantage is in low price to make a cool picture in 3D.
>
> I'm still working with my own brain to visualize, so maybe others
that
> have more better information and understanding can correct me.
>
> Paul
Paul,
I would group the packages thus:
- CADWorx, CADPIPE, AutoPLANT, AC Plant Designer <-Nothing is meant
by this order!!)
- QuickPEN et. al.
- Mech-Q
Why?
Group 1. has the largest capabilities (ie Pipe, Steel, P&ID,
Equipment, Auto IOS's, links to/or live databases, links to stress
analysis etc) and the most interoperability.
Group 2. good in capability but dose not have some of the features
that MAY be what our poster needs (such as P&ID's, live databases,
links to stress analysis etc.)
Group 3. may have many modules but I have not seen much in the way
of intergration - therefore it may be viewed as a total solution but
its intergration is no more than objects taking up space on a
drawing or in a model. Intergration is something that Mech-Q shows
little evednce of. For this group the bottom line is that you may
have to do the same work in producing a model or drawing but you
cannot leverage that information to produce 2D deliverabes such as
annotated plans/sections, automatic isometrics or linking to stress
analysis.
Vornel
Received on Thu Nov 04 12:01:00 2004